Article: MQA: A Review of controversies, concerns, and cautions

[Norton]

3 hours ago, Doug Schneider said:

What helped shake that was Chris's insistence not to pull down the "MQA is Vaporware" thread,

 

This implies that Chris was asked to pull the thread by a party or parties with sufficient  clout to make this a real prospect.  Is this really the case and if so, by whom? I find it hard to believe, as I can't readily see who that influential  party would be, in terms of potential lost advertising or sponsorship revenue for example.

[Norton]

12 hours ago, WiWavelength said:

the Tidal desktop app with MQA software decoder enabled always outputs a first "unfold," even for 44.1/48 kHz masters

 

This is one thing I don't get.  Where the master is 48 kHz,  what does  the initial decode do and how is this materially different from just playing the 48kHz undecoded file?

[Norton]

2 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

Hi Norton,

With MQA decoding, they could potentially recover a little more of the original bit depth.

 

As shown above with that Buno Mars sample in the article, we also see the "leaky" filter at work.

 

 

Thanks, that suggests when playing a 48kHz MQA master, there wouldn't be much audible difference whether played via an MQA decoder/DAC  or not.  Unfortunately my Tidal trial is finished so I can't compare  myself.

[Norton]

3 hours ago, Streamophile said:

Will MQA give me better audio than the standard 16/44,1 audio that I get from Hi-Fi streaming on Tidal?

 

My listening experience over the last year, mostly with a non-MQA DAC,  is that much of the time it will, but just like every other “format” there are good and less good examples. Whether or not it’s down to MQA itself or simply better masters exclusive to MQA is irrelevant in practice  -  the fact is you have a tidal account and simply want to get the best out of it.  I would tend to do go with Firedog’s advice and let the Tidal desktop do the first unfold.  Presumably you already have a DAC? If so you can use this right now with Tidal to do  much of the comparison  between MQA and non MQA versions and make your own mind up as to whether MQA has merit, before going any further.

The Project S2 Digital is probably the best MQA DAC of the few available of  similar  price to the Mojo, but I imagine the Mojo  will better it, especially for HP use.

[Norton]

2 hours ago, Streamophile said:

Does that make sense?

 

It’s certainly a workeable option.  I’ve owned the S2 but not the Mojo; however I have owned the original Hugo.  I believe the Mojo is also a preamp, but really intended primarily for mobile use, with analogue out only on a 3.5 jack so you’d need a special cable or an adapter  to use in a main system.

 

Overall, I suspect the Mojo will sound better and be a better HP amp, while the S2 will be more convenient in a main separates system.  Personally I ‘d chose more on overall SQ and likely majority use, rather than on the fact that the S2 is MQA and the Mojo isn’t, as the Tidal desktop will do the  MQA “first unfold” with either DAC.  Ideally best to audition each and make your mind up (including whether you like MQA or not).

 

Worth noting that there have been posts here reporting concerns over the S2’s build quality and firmware, but also on the cost of  replacing the Mojo’s batteries, so no easy contest on that score either.

 

You could also consider The Mytek  liberty (MQA) or RME ADI 2 DAC (not MQA) at the next price point (£800ish  here in UK).  No experience of either, but plenty on each in threads on this site and elsewhere.